Colt Considering Relocation Amid Talks of AR-15 Ban in Connecticut

Colt, a cornerstone name in both firearms and American history, is considering leaving their home state of Connecticut after almost two centuries of record thanks to the push by Governor Dannel Malloy to ban the AR-15.

For 177 years Colt has manufactured guns for the armies of the U.S. and its people, from the Single Action Army to the LE6920, the consumer version of the M4 carbine, the main service rifle of most of the military.

“I think there’s more than enough Democratic support. My hope is that we could do this on a bipartisan basis, but if we can’t do it on bipartisan basis, that we should get [a gun ban] done,” said Malloy.

He continued, “I’m anxious to see the legislature do it. But doing it right is more important than doing it quickly, so if I have to wait until the first week of June to get a good package, then that’s okay, too.”

That being said, Malloy does not want to lose the gun industry, either.

But if such legislation passes and Colt stays in-state, the company’s reputation will take a potentially fatal blow. Colt CEO Dennis Veilleux is well-aware of the long memories of gun owners.

In 2000, after striking an agreement with the Clinton administration, a nation-wide Smith & Wesson boycott crippled the company, which later sold for pennies on the dollar after Smith was forced to close several manufacturing facilities following a massive drop in sales.

“Our customers are unusually brand-loyal,” said Veilleux in an op-ed published in the Hartford Courant. “In many cases, they personally identify with the firearm brand they choose. Although our Connecticut heritage has historically enhanced our brand, that will change overnight if we ban the modern sporting rifle.

“As a result Colt, as well as other Connecticut manufacturers such as Mossberg and Stag Arms will see immediate erosion in brand strength and market share as customers migrate to manufacturers in more supportive states. This will have consequences for dozens of Connecticut companies and thousands of workers. Connecticut will have put its firearms manufacturing industry in jeopardy: one that contributes $1.7 billion annually to the state’s economy.

“Like every other precision manufacturer in Connecticut, Colt is constantly approached by other states to relocate, but our roots here are deep. Colt is and always has been an integral part of a state characterized by hard work, perseverance and ingenuity.”

Many states are pitching woo towards the Connecticut gun industry, targeting Colt specifically. While it’s true that it would be hypocritical for Colt to profit on the sale of firearms in what Malloy wishes to be a ban state if increased gun control legislation passes, the realities of the situation aren’t all that nuanced; Colt isn’t looking at losing money by not selling certain guns in Connecticut — Colt is looking at being run out of business by gun owners across America.

Colt does intend to stand their ground and fight for gun rights and their employees. Earlier this year Colt shut down for a day, taking 400 people from their plant to the capitol to protest proposed gun laws.

“The employees are what the company is,” continued Veilleux. “It’s not a building with a bunch of machines in it. The company is the employees. They’re proud of what they do, they represent their community – and I would say a lot more than some of the legislators do. They’re real people.”

“At some point, if you can’t sell your products … then you can’t run your business,” said Veilleux. “You need customers to buy your products to stay in business.”

If Colt stays in Connecticut despite increased gun control, would you boycott them?

Yeah, its a tricky issue, b/c it does seem wrong for the state to get $$$ from products they ban, it also seems cruel to punish the workers by taking their jobs. They didn't ban guns, and chances are they didn't vote for these legislators either. Also, what if they move to another state, and that state subsequently bans guns? I do agree about not selling to law enforcement in a state that bans guns.

I own a couple S&W's, my old model 59 I've carried since 1978 and a newer model 5906 which I bought from a local PD when they changed out their side arms. Only have 1 Colt. I'd like to see Colt move down to Arkansas near the Walthers plant that was opened in association with Colt(I believe it was).

its not the gun companys fault , or its employees , its the politics , I think its sad that we have so many dumb people running our beloved country into the ground because politics have no common sense!

I agree, Idt its right to put all those people out of work for something their legislators did. I'm sure they did not even vote for those legislators. If the company stays there, and don't sell to police departments in that state, and fight to get the law overturned.

Yes I would boycott Colt in a heartbeat and do hold a crutch too.
And this goes for all gun and parts manufacturers that don't leave draconian states.
This is a time to make a clear stand for the 2nd and there are no excuses for anyone in the industry, you either are for the constitution or you are not simple as that.

I would never boycott Colt. That said, I WOULD like to see all firearms manufacturers leave Connecticut. In fact, I wouldn't even just stop at firearms. If the state of Connecticut is so against weapons, lets see other weapons companies move, as well. Start With Sikorski Aircraft. And Norden Systems. General Dynamics, and Electric Boat. General Electric and Pratt and Whitney. ALL these companies manufacture weapons, or weapons SYSTEMS that make guns look like pea shooters. Lets see ALL of them move. Connecticut will become a ghost town. All that'll be left will be a bunch of assholes in Hartford playing with themselves.

As a former Marine who is quite familiar with the Colt product line, I would indeed never purchase their firearms or accessories until they moved to a State that does not practice systematic soft attacks on our 2nd Amendment Rights.

The problem with the manufacturer relocating into a gun friendly state is with the employees having to move also or look for another job, I see the manufacturer point and I'm behind them 100% but its the employees that really lose out they either have to pick up and move too or change jobs and we all know how hard that is to find a good job these days. better off just throwing the Gov. out recall them and get some people in office that sides with the majority of the people not the minority of there own little clan. They forget the gov. works for us, you the people and until they start listening to you what the people majority wants, they need to leave get kicked out and replaced with people who will listen to us.

Well Steve, ideally we could remove all corrupt politicians from the government, but in reality that's a goal that will never be attained. Colt has a responsibility to do its art to ensure that overreaching lawmakers are held accountable by removing money from their budgets. Colt could offer to relocate their employees if they wish to remain employed by Colt.

Idea: Colt manufactures a limited run with a special logo. Sells them at cost or temporarily in the red plus a couple of hundred extra to drop in an operating fund for relocation. That funds 100% for the family relocation. This might bring some loyalty back as well. I would buy 2, even though I don't need any more... but not needing something has never stopped me from buying what I want. People can throw away their resentment over Colt being, "over priced" for a bit. Colt might even change their business model for civilian sales.

Last one, I promise. The employees and their families should be willing to move. At 45, I can't leave my crappy Left Coast state; I'm halfway to retirement and I can be replaced by 3 20 year olds for what I make. As hard and as wrong as this is. The chain reaction will hurt a lot of people. It's the cost of war. Hey, The Nameless One said, "Make it hurt."

Colt has already opened a facility here in central Florida. We would love to have the 1.7 BILLION in taxes and watch states like Connecticut and Maryland cut their own throats as big gun manufacturers move out to more supportive states.

I feel bad for the loyal employees, but if the employee can't buy their own product the company needs to relocate. I would boycott Colt if they stayed and the bans become law. I give Colt extra consideration in buying their product if they moved and took a stand.

"Get out of there" states that support the erosion of our freedoms and constitutional rights don't deserve the support of true Americans. It is best to make the move NOW because those liberal, socialist eastern states won't change. It is just a matter of time they will force Colt out of business anyway. Time to get a fresh start, and for that matter it is time for America to get a fresh start.